Pickleball Ratings: An Analysis of Different Systems

Introduction

Before diving into the different pickleball rating systems, it’s essential to discuss the concept of cheating, using golf as an analogy. Golf, a game plagued by cheating, offers valuable insights into rating systems. In golf, a player’s handicap can be compared to a pickleball rating.

Golfers cheat in two main ways, both unsportsmanlike but differing in impact. Some shave points off their score to artificially lower it, hurting themselves if they use these scores against their handicap. Others deliberately inflate their scores to increase their handicap, gaining an unfair advantage. Here are some common cheating methods in golf:

  1. Improving Lies: Moving the ball to a better position without counting it as a stroke, resulting in a falsely lower score.
  2. Mulligans: Taking extra shots without counting them, often referred to as “do-overs,” also leading to an inaccurately lower score.
  3. Incorrect Scorekeeping: Falsifying scores on the scorecard, either by reporting fewer strokes or ignoring penalty strokes.
  4. Foot Wedges: Using one’s foot to nudge the ball into a better position.
  5. Gimmies: Taking putts that are not actually conceded by the opponent, especially in stroke play.
  6. Sandbagging: Misrepresenting one’s handicap to gain an advantage in tournaments.
  7. Moving Obstacles: Illegally moving objects or obstacles that should remain in place according to the rules.

These actions undermine the integrity of golf and can lead to severe consequences, such as disqualification or expulsion from a club. BTW, intentionally trying to lower your handicap through cheating is just plain stupid.

Golf Handicap and Pickleball Rating

A golf handicap reflects a player’s potential and ensures fair competition. For instance, in a club championship 20 years ago, my handicap was just under 10, while my opponent’s was about 32. This meant I had to give him one shot per hole and two on the hardest holes. On the final, hardest hole, despite my advantage, my opponent’s miraculous 50-foot putt and my three-putt led to his unexpected victory. This scenario illustrates the importance of handicaps in maintaining competitive balance.

If pickleball adopted a similar system, where a higher-rated player had to give points to a lower-rated opponent, it could lead to widespread manipulation. Players might understate their skills to gain an advantage, resulting in a distorted playing field. I am not, by the way, suggesting this concept – it is just a fun idea I came up with.

Pickleball Rating Systems

Let’s explore the major pickleball rating systems: USAPA (now USAP), DUPR, and IPTPA.

  1. USAPA (now USAP) System

The USAPA rating, determined by the USA Pickleball Tournament Ratings (UTPR), is based on a player’s performance in sanctioned tournaments. These tournaments adhere to official rules and standards, with referees ensuring fair play. The USAPA system primarily focuses on competitive sanctioned tournament play, making it difficult to manipulate ratings. Since only wins and losses are considered, and not match scores, the UTPR can sometimes lack precision.

  1. DUPR (Dynamic Universal Pickleball Rating)

DUPR incorporates league, tournament, and recreational play. This dynamic rating system updates regularly based on match results against other rated players. However, its inclusion of recreational play makes it susceptible to manipulation. Players can intentionally lower their ratings in non-tournament settings, allowing them to compete in tournaments at an inaccurately low skill level.

  1. IPTPA (International Pickleball Teaching Professional Association)

IPTPA employs a qualitative approach, using a series of tests to determine a player’s rating. This system emphasizes performance on specific skills, regardless of age. For instance, a 70-year-old and a 40-year-old who perform equally well on the 4.0 test would both receive a 4.0 rating. However, this method doesn’t account for the physical advantages younger players might have, potentially leading to mismatches in competitive play. Additionally, performance in practice or tests may not accurately reflect competitive performance.

Below is an image that shows the skills test for a 3.0 player. Note that the test does not specify how many times a player has to be successful. For a 3.0 player, the drop shots from the baseline may be something like 4 out of 10. As you progress in ratings tests, those numbers increase.

Also, this is not a “drop dead” test. The scores are cumulative, so it you perform poorly on drop shots from the baseline, but perform well from the transition line, you may pass the tests.

Finally, you can see that you have to play 3 games of “ghost doubles.” I have explained this game elsewhere in my blog. Again, this is not a win-or-lose proposition, and the scores are cumulative.

Note that I have not included the performance criteria.

While this is, in my opinion, a good rating technique, it is not recognized for tournaments. It is something you can use to determine where you should be rated, and what level tournaments you should play in.

Conclusion: What Do We Need?

In tennis, the United States Tennis Association (USTA) uses officials to conduct player evaluations and National Tennis Rating Program (NTRP) verifications, ensuring players compete at their correct skill level. Players can be disqualified or have their ratings adjusted mid-tournament if necessary.

Pickleball would benefit from a similar system. In my opinion, implementing real-time evaluations and adjustments could maintain competitive fairness and prevent players from exploiting the system. An option to disqualify or re-rate players during tournaments would enhance the integrity and enjoyment of the sport.